Sergei Gotsmanov Posted 15 May, 2010 Share Posted 15 May, 2010 Hursley and Hambledon I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 15 May, 2010 Author Share Posted 15 May, 2010 When I get the chance i'll scan a photo i've got of when my old man worked on a farm in the early 50's nr Crawley, Winchester. There's about 100 people in the photo including my dad and 4 or 5 of his brothers, it's amazing seeing all those people considering how half a dozen people probably work the same land now. Crawley is sadly now a yuppies village. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 15 May, 2010 Share Posted 15 May, 2010 When I get the chance i'll scan a photo i've got of when my old man worked on a farm in the early 50's nr Crawley, Winchester. There's about 100 people in the photo including my dad and 4 or 5 of his brothers, it's amazing seeing all those people considering how half a dozen people probably work the same land now. Crawley is sadly now a yuppies village. Remember seeing a government report a few years ago showing that the residents of villages in the south east were primarily people who worked in the major towns and cities whilst the people who worked in the villages (farms, shops etc) were forced by price to live in the major towns. There is a ridiculous situation where the two groups pass each other each day as they go to work or go home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlakeySFC Posted 15 May, 2010 Share Posted 15 May, 2010 George Osborne is a million times better than Alastair "Rupert Bear" Darling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bognor Posted 15 May, 2010 Share Posted 15 May, 2010 It is not about what you think it is about whether people should enforce their moral believesonto other people. I say no and no again. One day somebody will decide they do not like something that you do. It is about the right to choose to live your life how you like. It is about what I think right now as Hunting didn't feature much in the election. I want my politicians to sort out the mess we are in. 10's of thousands of people are losing thier jobs every month and as a country we are not far off being bankrupt. As I said, I don't have a strong view either way because there are more important things to worry about. Fix them first, then 'we' can move on to less important things and I may come round to forming a view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 16 May, 2010 Share Posted 16 May, 2010 Foxes are vermin, not some cuddly Basil Brush like pet. shut up rupert ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 16 May, 2010 Share Posted 16 May, 2010 George Osborne is a million times better than Alastair "Rupert Bear" Darling. This George Osborne, you mean? "Because this is as opportune a moment as any to run through George Osborne's economic experience in full: he doesn't have any. And to enumerate the number of jobs he's had in business/the City/finance: none. And his relevant educational qualifications? Zero. Consider this: I am as qualified to be chancellor as George Osborne. Which I don't know about you, but it scares the hell out of me. I can't even manage my personal finances. But then, actually, we have this in common, Osborne can't either. It's his wife who arranged their mortgage. And, interestingly for a father of two, in his late 30s, who's poised to be in charge of our £163bn deficit, he got his daddy to act as his guarantor. And let's not even get into the accidental "flipping" of his second home." from this: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/may/16/carole-cadwalladr-women-politics-power Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 16 May, 2010 Share Posted 16 May, 2010 This George Osborne, you mean? "Because this is as opportune a moment as any to run through George Osborne's economic experience in full: he doesn't have any. And to enumerate the number of jobs he's had in business/the City/finance: none. And his relevant educational qualifications? Zero. Consider this: I am as qualified to be chancellor as George Osborne. Which I don't know about you, but it scares the hell out of me. I can't even manage my personal finances. But then, actually, we have this in common, Osborne can't either. It's his wife who arranged their mortgage. And, interestingly for a father of two, in his late 30s, who's poised to be in charge of our £163bn deficit, he got his daddy to act as his guarantor. And let's not even get into the accidental "flipping" of his second home." from this: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/may/16/carole-cadwalladr-women-politics-power case closed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 16 May, 2010 Share Posted 16 May, 2010 This George Osborne, you mean? "Because this is as opportune a moment as any to run through George Osborne's economic experience in full: he doesn't have any. And to enumerate the number of jobs he's had in business/the City/finance: none. And his relevant educational qualifications? Zero. Consider this: I am as qualified to be chancellor as George Osborne. Which I don't know about you, but it scares the hell out of me. I can't even manage my personal finances. But then, actually, we have this in common, Osborne can't either. It's his wife who arranged their mortgage. And, interestingly for a father of two, in his late 30s, who's poised to be in charge of our £163bn deficit, he got his daddy to act as his guarantor. And let's not even get into the accidental "flipping" of his second home." from this: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/may/16/carole-cadwalladr-women-politics-power case closed Seriously. wtf were they thinking in making him Chancellor? There must be dozens if Tories who would be a better choice than him. I cant think of any redeeming features. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 17 May, 2010 Share Posted 17 May, 2010 Seriously. wtf were they thinking in making him Chancellor? There must be dozens if Tories who would be a better choice than him. I cant think of any redeeming features. Indeed. Actually the whole point of the article was to bemoan the small number of women that DC has appointed to senior positions. As far as the job of Chancellor is concerned, the article pointed out that Teresa May has far more relevant and very senior experience. But she didn't go to Eton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 17 May, 2010 Share Posted 17 May, 2010 Actually the whole point of the article was to bemoan the small number of women that DC has appointed to senior positions. Which is slightly more than will contest the Labour leadership.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 17 May, 2010 Share Posted 17 May, 2010 After the financial mis-management of the country's debt over the last 13 years by 'experts', giving it to someone who hasn't got a Scooby could well turn out to be genius. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 17 May, 2010 Share Posted 17 May, 2010 Which is slightly more than will contest the Labour leadership.... :smt061 This may shock you sweetie but I wasn't actually making a political point here (about the paucity of women in the cabinet) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Bateman Posted 17 May, 2010 Share Posted 17 May, 2010 Actually the whole point of the article was to bemoan the small number of women that DC has appointed to senior positions. Women shouldn't be allowed to vote, let alone be an MP, let alone make important decisions for the country! Get with the times! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint George Posted 17 May, 2010 Share Posted 17 May, 2010 This George Osborne, you mean? "Because this is as opportune a moment as any to run through George Osborne's economic experience in full: he doesn't have any. And to enumerate the number of jobs he's had in business/the City/finance: none. And his relevant educational qualifications? Zero. Consider this: I am as qualified to be chancellor as George Osborne. Which I don't know about you, but it scares the hell out of me. I can't even manage my personal finances. But then, actually, we have this in common, Osborne can't either. It's his wife who arranged their mortgage. And, interestingly for a father of two, in his late 30s, who's poised to be in charge of our £163bn deficit, he got his daddy to act as his guarantor. And let's not even get into the accidental "flipping" of his second home." from this: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/may/16/carole-cadwalladr-women-politics-power You think it's posible for he and his team to be any worse than the lot that just left? "Speaking at the Treasury today Mr Laws told reporters: 'When I arrived at my desk on the very first day as Chief Secretary, I found a letter from the previous chief secretary to give me some advice, I assumed, on how I conduct myself over the months ahead. 'Unfortunately, when I opened it, it was a one-sentence letter which simply said "Dear Chief Secretary, I'm afraid to tell you there's no money left", which was honest but slightly less helpful advice than I had been expecting.' http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1279043/George-Osborne-deliver-emergency-Budget-June-22.html I don't think the bar could have been set much 'lower' than that lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 17 May, 2010 Share Posted 17 May, 2010 You think it's posible for he and his team to be any worse than the lot that just left? "Speaking at the Treasury today Mr Laws told reporters: 'When I arrived at my desk on the very first day as Chief Secretary, I found a letter from the previous chief secretary to give me some advice, I assumed, on how I conduct myself over the months ahead. 'Unfortunately, when I opened it, it was a one-sentence letter which simply said "Dear Chief Secretary, I'm afraid to tell you there's no money left", which was honest but slightly less helpful advice than I had been expecting.' http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1279043/George-Osborne-deliver-emergency-Budget-June-22.html I don't think the bar could have been set much 'lower' than that lol And Mr Laws has just been on the radio and said he realised it was 'tongue in cheek' [for the information of foreigners, that means it's a joke] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bognor Posted 17 May, 2010 Share Posted 17 May, 2010 'Unfortunately, when I opened it, it was a one-sentence letter which simply said "Dear Chief Secretary, I'm afraid to tell you there's no money left", which was honest but slightly less helpful advice than I had been expecting.' .... and that's the problem with socialism. They always run out of other people's money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 17 May, 2010 Share Posted 17 May, 2010 And Mr Laws has just been on the radio and said he realised it was 'tongue in cheek' [for the information of foreigners, that means it's a joke] Interestingly Radio 4 included that, and comment from his Labour predecessor in the 5 o'clock bulletin, but then left it out of the 6 o'clock one :confused: Conspiracy theory concerning the licence fee anybody ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 17 May, 2010 Share Posted 17 May, 2010 .... and that's the problem with socialism. They always run out of other people's money. And the problem with LibDems sucking up to their Tory masters, is that they left their sense of humour at the door when they signed the ConDem subserviance pact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bognor Posted 17 May, 2010 Share Posted 17 May, 2010 And the problem with LibDems sucking up to their Tory masters, is that they left their sense of humour at the door when they signed the ConDem subserviance pact. Oh yes, the millions of people that are going to be affected by the current economic climate is a laugh a minute. I'm glad you find it funny though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 17 May, 2010 Share Posted 17 May, 2010 Oh yes, the millions of people that are going to be affected by the current economic climate is a laugh a minute. I'm glad you find it funny though. Just to keep you fully informed, both my wife and I work in the public sector, and will be directly affected by whatever spending squeeze was going to be applied by whoever won the election. However, I do find it quite funny how some people treat every word of drivel peddled by the Daily Hail as gospel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bognor Posted 17 May, 2010 Share Posted 17 May, 2010 Just to keep you fully informed, both my wife and I work in the public sector, and will be directly affected by whatever spending squeeze was going to be applied by whoever won the election. However, I do find it quite funny how some people treat every word of drivel peddled by the Daily Hail as gospel. Are you suggesting it didn't happen? Anyway, Liam Byrne is founder of the computer company e-Government Solutions Ltd, a provider of e-commerce solutions to government. Is that how they redistributed wealth, from taxpayers to the chief secretary of the treasury's personal company? No wonder he finds it thoroughly amusing, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 17 May, 2010 Share Posted 17 May, 2010 Are you suggesting it didn't happen? Anyway, Liam Byrne is founder of the computer company e-Government Solutions Ltd, a provider of e-commerce solutions to government. Is that how they redistributed wealth, from taxpayers to the chief secretary of the treasury's personal company? No wonder he finds it thoroughly amusing, eh? And Maggie's cabal outsourced large chunks of the civil service IT function to Arthur Andersen, who purely by coincidence could count Edwina Currie's husband and brother-in-law amongst their senior executives. They also played a major part in the scandalous collapse of Wessex Helicopters. I am not claiming that Labour are blameless, but don't kid yourself this lot will be any better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 17 May, 2010 Share Posted 17 May, 2010 Great, concensus at last: all the parties are as bad as eachother. NOW can we close this section of the forum down? :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint George Posted 18 May, 2010 Share Posted 18 May, 2010 And the problem with LibDems sucking up to their Tory masters, is that they left their sense of humour at the door when they signed the ConDem subserviance pact. Dunno what's up with them....Running up a $3Trillion debt in 13 years flat and still managed to get 28% of the Country to vote for them is ****ing hilarious in my book...No wonder he felt like bragging about it Shame some y'all will have to start paying it all back any day now....Still, was good while it lasted eh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 18 May, 2010 Share Posted 18 May, 2010 You think it's posible for he and his team to be any worse than the lot that just left? "Speaking at the Treasury today Mr Laws told reporters: 'When I arrived at my desk on the very first day as Chief Secretary, I found a letter from the previous chief secretary to give me some advice, I assumed, on how I conduct myself over the months ahead. 'Unfortunately, when I opened it, it was a one-sentence letter which simply said "Dear Chief Secretary, I'm afraid to tell you there's no money left", which was honest but slightly less helpful advice than I had been expecting.' http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1279043/George-Osborne-deliver-emergency-Budget-June-22.html I don't think the bar could have been set much 'lower' than that lol what a stupid man, we have a deficit, we always have a deficit, there is never any money, its just how much we choose to borrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 18 May, 2010 Share Posted 18 May, 2010 (edited) Dunno what's up with them....Running up a $3Trillion debt in 13 years flat and still managed to get 28% of the Country to vote for them is ****ing hilarious in my book...No wonder he felt like bragging about it Shame some y'all will have to start paying it all back any day now....Still, was good while it lasted eh StG, could you do me a favour - look up and publish on here the US national debt, ta Here's a clue http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/ According to that, as of now, YOU owe over US$41,900. Edit: and as for working with a budget deficit, this is what they are doing on your side of the pond; (Reuters) - The United States posted an $82.69 billion deficit in April, nearly four times the $20.91 billion shortfall registered in April 2009 and the largest on record for that month, the Treasury Department said on Wednesday. "White House budget director Peter Orszag told Reuters Insider in an interview on Wednesday that the United States must tackle its deficits quickly to avoid the kind of debt crisis that hit Greece." ( from http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64B53W20100512 ) What is that saying about people in glass houses ? Edited 18 May, 2010 by badgerx16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 18 May, 2010 Share Posted 18 May, 2010 Tune in next week for another episode of "My link is better then your link" hosted by the linkster himself, Lennie Bennett Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 18 May, 2010 Share Posted 18 May, 2010 St G is still waiting for BO to be knocked off by white supremacists. St G and Stanley must be friends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 18 May, 2010 Author Share Posted 18 May, 2010 St G is still waiting for BO to be knocked off by white supremacists. St G and Stanley must be friends. Have you ever said anything remotely interesting in your entire life? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint George Posted 18 May, 2010 Share Posted 18 May, 2010 StG, could you do me a favour - look up and publish on here the US national debt, ta Here's a clue http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/ According to that, as of now, YOU owe over US$41,900. Edit: and as for working with a budget deficit, this is what they are doing on your side of the pond; (Reuters) - The United States posted an $82.69 billion deficit in April, nearly four times the $20.91 billion shortfall registered in April 2009 and the largest on record for that month, the Treasury Department said on Wednesday. "White House budget director Peter Orszag told Reuters Insider in an interview on Wednesday that the United States must tackle its deficits quickly to avoid the kind of debt crisis that hit Greece." ( from http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64B53W20100512 ) What is that saying about people in glass houses ? Hey, you're preaching to the choir here...As you know, I'm vehemently against socialism where ever it raises it's ugly head...I always said that if Chairman 'O' was to get elected, we could look forward to a unprecedented spending frenzy and that's exactly what we've got....Although the tax payer debt of $41 k is nothing like the $110k debt per person, the socialist's in Britain ran up on your behalf...That really took some doing....What was wrong with you peeps to keep coming back for more like that? It just goes to prove, there's no way in this world, you can trust socialist's with any kind of Government....Of course, there are plenty of tiny minded peeps around who would prefer to believe that anybody who didn't support 'Zero' are just racist's....That's about the extent of their comprehension...There again, that's probably why they're also socialist's...tiny minds and all that. Difference between here and there is, there ain't a chance in hell peeps here are gunna put up with it for 13 years...Just watch the mid term elections this November...Watch the brakes get put on, as the vermin get put out on the streets and watch Chairman 'O' get reduced to a 'Lame Duck' for the rest of his 'One and Done' term...The 'Tea Party' movement is already a huge force to reckoned with, and that's only after a year. '13 years' of socialist spending frenzy?....I don't think so. Oh, and good luck to Dale Peterson....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jU7fhIO7DG0&feature=related Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 18 May, 2010 Share Posted 18 May, 2010 Hey, you're preaching to the choir here...As you know, I'm vehemently against socialism where ever it raises it's ugly head...I always said that if Chairman 'O' was to get elected, we could look forward to a unprecedented spending frenzy and that's exactly what we've got....Although the tax payer debt of $41 k is nothing like the $110k debt per person, the socialist's in Britain ran up on your behalf...That really took some doing....What was wrong with you peeps to keep coming back for more like that? It just goes to prove, there's no way in this world, you can trust socialist's with any kind of Government....Of course, there are plenty of tiny minded peeps around who would prefer to believe that anybody who didn't support 'Zero' are just racist's....That's about the extent of their comprehension...There again, that's probably why they're also socialist's...tiny minds and all that. Difference between here and there is, there ain't a chance in hell peeps here are gunna put up with it for 13 years...Just watch the mid term elections this November...Watch the brakes get put on, as the vermin get put out on the streets and watch Chairman 'O' get reduced to a 'Lame Duck' for the rest of his 'One and Done' term...The 'Tea Party' movement is already a huge force to reckoned with, and that's only after a year. '13 years' of socialist spending frenzy?....I don't think so. Oh, and good luck to Dale Peterson....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jU7fhIO7DG0&feature=related erm, hasnt BO only been in power for one year, it was Capitalist Bush for ages before that, and before that Socialist Clinton who was credited with hugely reucing the national debt in the US Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joensuu Posted 18 May, 2010 Share Posted 18 May, 2010 Difference between here and there is, there ain't a chance in hell peeps here are gunna put up with it for 13 years... ... is that because the Twenty-second Amendment prevents it? NB, please look up 'socialism' in a dictionary, and then please explain why it relates in any way to the centre-right UK government led by Blair and Brown. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I though socialists were left of centre? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint George Posted 18 May, 2010 Share Posted 18 May, 2010 erm, hasnt BO only been in power for one year, it was Capitalist Bush for ages before that, and before that Socialist Clinton who was credited with hugely reucing the national debt in the US What part of..... "The United States posted an $82.69 billion deficit in April, nearly four times the $20.91 billion shortfall registered in April 2009 and the largest on record for that month,".....didn't you understand?... Economically, Clinton did a pretty decent job....But he was hardly a Socialist was he? Socialist's don't do 'debt reduction', they just leave it for others to clean up the mess........Are you really trying to put 'Clinton' in the same group as Brown, Blair and Chairman 'O'?.....Or compare the traditional Democratic Party with it's latest 'Incarnation'? Or the British Labour party? And as for Bush...I'll point 'some' of the same fingers as you, Not that i thought he was 'that' bad....I just have more 'Libertarian' in me than Republican.. Hell, even today's Tories are more 'left' than the Old Democrat Party Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 18 May, 2010 Share Posted 18 May, 2010 Tories and Labour havent been that different on debt over the past 35 years. Debt tends to come down during a boom and go up during a recession. http://www.debtbombshell.com/britains-budget-deficit.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 18 May, 2010 Share Posted 18 May, 2010 What part of..... "The United States posted an $82.69 billion deficit in April, nearly four times the $20.91 billion shortfall registered in April 2009 and the largest on record for that month,".....didn't you understand?... Economically, Clinton did a pretty decent job....But he was hardly a Socialist was he? Socialist's don't do 'debt reduction', they just leave it for others to clean up the mess........Are you really trying to put 'Clinton' in the same group as Brown, Blair and Chairman 'O'?.....Or compare the traditional Democratic Party with it's latest 'Incarnation'? Or the British Labour party? And as for Bush...I'll point 'some' of the same fingers as you, Not that i thought he was 'that' bad....I just have more 'Libertarian' in me than Republican.. Hell, even today's Tories are more 'left' than the Old Democrat Party please stay in the US, thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted 18 May, 2010 Share Posted 18 May, 2010 Tories and Labour havent been that different on debt over the past 35 years. Debt tends to come down during a boom and go up during a recession. http://www.debtbombshell.com/britains-budget-deficit.htm Distorted by the fact that the years when the debt was reducing in the 80's coincided with the peak years for UK oil & gas revenue. and everyone thought 'Lucky' was such a good Chancellor.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 20 May, 2010 Share Posted 20 May, 2010 What part of..... "The United States posted an $82.69 billion deficit in April, nearly four times the $20.91 billion shortfall registered in April 2009 and the largest on record for that month,".....didn't you understand?... Economically, Clinton did a pretty decent job....But he was hardly a Socialist was he? Socialist's don't do 'debt reduction', they just leave it for others to clean up the mess........Are you really trying to put 'Clinton' in the same group as Brown, Blair and Chairman 'O'?.....Or compare the traditional Democratic Party with it's latest 'Incarnation'? Or the British Labour party? And as for Bush...I'll point 'some' of the same fingers as you, Not that i thought he was 'that' bad....I just have more 'Libertarian' in me than Republican.. Hell, even today's Tories are more 'left' than the Old Democrat Party You think BO and GB shouldnt have bailed out the banks then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now